Q: do you think the attorneys help the defendant make up their story? I know it's not allowed and a breach of ethics, but in reality is that how it works? Or did AH come up with this seriously convoluted sequence all by herself?
Juror No. 1: White female. Exercises with a family law attorney. Parents got divorced when she lived in the Bahamas when she was 5.....and her mother lived in Scotland. She went to boarding school in England when she was 11. At 16 she moved to NC.
Juror No. 2: White male. Worked at a store Grant visited after the murder.
Juror No. 3: White male. Bruins fan. Was a snowmobile racer in the past.
Juror No. 4: Black female.
Juror No. 5: White female.
Juror No. 6: White male. Redskins and Hurricane fan.
Juror No. 7: White female, worked for state attorney general's office; however, J#7 said she can be unbiased. UNCW accounting grad, now works with children at YMCA. Parents divorced when she was 4. She lived with mom, her brother lived with mom. "Caught blurb on TV about" Ackerson murder; didn't know Grant Hayes was convicted. Watches ABC-11 in the morning; for weather and traffic. "I hear about murders, but I'm just trying to get ready for work" Mother is a construction lawyer; J#7: "I could hear her talking about it when I was little, but it was boring." (Prior juror defense peremptory challenge).
Juror No. 8: White female. Oncology nurse attached to Rex Hospital. Asked if she's ever met a pathological liar; she answers yes, husband of former coworker who served in Afghanistan. Testifies that friend who was married to pathological liar had 2 wives at the same time; "he was very charismatic ..." "He was just a homeboy from Tennessee." Juror No. 8 says friend's ex-husband concealed second marriage for 14 years. When she was younger, Juror No. 8 was a paralegal specializing in medical cases in Charleston, S.C
Juror No. 9: Latino female who is a paralegal who helps those with immigration issues. Doesn't "really look at news sites or TV." She looks at Internet daily on her Yahoo email page, doesn't watch TV crime dramas (Second juror excused. First juror excused defense peremptory challenge)
Juror No. 10: White female. Has NO knowledge of Grant or Amanda Hayes, Grant's trial or anything related to Laura Ackerson's death. Sister is a probation officer in Wake County; has one friend who is member of Raleigh PD, friend who quit RPD in 2010. Peace College graduate, has been married for 4 months; husband has been Raleigh firefighter for 12 years. Birth father gave up custody of her and her brother after divorce; her stepfather formally adopted them. Doesn't have cable TV; she predominately watches Netflix for entertainment. Ex-husband cheated on her and stole money from their joint bank accounts (Dismissed a third time Dismissed by the Judge. First juror dismissed defense peremptory challenge).
Juror No. 11: Black female. Admits she is a fan of "Murder She Wrote." Says she enjoys "Murder She Wrote" because she likes mysteries; says she can keep open mind in this trial. Read stories about Grant's case but mis-remembered some of the details. Divorced because her ex-husband had an affair for indeterminate time.
Juror No. 12: Middle-aged white female. She has two children - 17 y/o who lives with her, 14 y/o who lives with child's father Bachelors degree in psychology: however, "I must've missed the day we talked about sociopaths." She was threatened by anonymous female caller from a blocked number a few years ago; filed police report but suspect never found. (State dismissed with peremptory challenge first no. 12)
Q: do you think the attorneys help the defendant make up their story? I know it's not allowed and a breach of ethics, but in reality is that how it works? Or did AH come up with this seriously convoluted sequence all by herself?
HiYa, Softail!! Glad you're here!:seeya:
Oh, I respectfully disagree. Although a slow-talker, he is filling in every single gap, anticipating every question the jurors might have. He's setting this up for reasonable doubt, i.e., the State did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt. I did not expect him to be this thorough. I think he's doing well considering the facts.
I hope the jurors really grasp the jury instructions once they're read about acting in concert and circumstantial evidence.
I think he sounds silly....everything he's saying...I mean, not him personally, the defense's theory. It's all so silly. I think the jury comes back in 4 hours.
Now I find myself wondering who, in Target while I'm there, just murdered someone!
And Amanda was koochy-kooing with the evil monster at the jail and in her communications with him through her mother. What does that make her???
Now I find myself wondering who, in Target while I'm there, just murdered someone!
:seeya: Glad you are too!
I don't know, :dunno: I actually kind of feel sorry for this guy. I also think he is just getting old. :aktion1: